Allowed

Om Prakash and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 May 2023A482/6051/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings arising from offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC. The court exercised inherent powers after a compromise was reached between the parties, finding no service of purpose in continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Case Crime No.1474 of 2013 in S.T. No.684 of 2014 are quashed against the applicants and opposite party no.2.

Om Prakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:104253

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6051 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Om Prakash And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Raj Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Mr. Anand Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 Mr. Ram Raj Mishra.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants to quash the entire proceeding of S.T. No.684 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No.1474 of 2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, Police Station Bitharichainpur, District Bareilly on the basis of compromise dated 04.02.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that in the alleged incident, both parties have lodged FIR against each other and during pendency, the parties have entered into compromise and the same has been filed before the court below, which was verified by the court below vide order dated15.04.2023, copy of the same has been filed as Annexure No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. He has further submitted that since parties have settled the dispute, opposite party no.2 also does not want to proceed with trial, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, he has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed.

¶11

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶12

The Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions, viz., Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and

¶13

others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶14

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed .

¶16

The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case against the applicants as well as against the opposite party no.2 are hereby quashed.

¶17

Order Date :- 15.5.2023

¶18

Ajeet

¶19

Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Om Prakash and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prempal Singh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Monu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Abdul Rahman Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailash Chand Sharma@ Kailashi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Afsar and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another